RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Re: YourTrading Question Wise post explman - removing Bakker as the CEO was the first task - now it is imperative Bakker is removed completely from every aspect of the company. Once that is done the focus needs to shift to the remaining board members, all of whom were co-culpable in the points you made in your last post, Pearce and Hewlett specifically
As for McGuigan - we need to know- how did he get on the board? who brought him into the company? what experience does he have with Vanadium? Have any of you had any direct communication with McGuigan? I have had a few email exchanges with him and here's what I gather from him : he is not qualified as a Geologist in Quebec, which means he would have to pawn off any work carried out on the Lac Dore or Iron T -his experience does not include Titano- mag deposits like VRB's assets, this would cause serious problems contrary to what he would lead us to believe ; also, McGuigan has no interest or experience running VRB as a CEO, he wants to get back in the lab/field, this means we need to watch his next moves very carefully.
Although disastrous for the shareholders, because of the non stop dilution, a rollback of some sort was inevitable. The reason you are getting a 10-1 rollback is twofold: a) not a single director of the 6 has any capabilities to control or manage the market of a company with 300 million shares in its float, b) a 10-1 rollback is the maximum allowed by management without shareholder approval.
The debt financing is equally as disastrous, not only for the shareholders, but for the company as well. The debt financing provides pure hard cash No flow through. This presents a very advantageous situation for the insiders, and those owed money by the company. There is no corresponding obligation to do ANY work on the projects. McGuigan's setting of budgets is purely conjecture at this point.
If you would like to oppose McGuigan and Board's plan to use a debt instrument to finance the company at this crucial time, I will provide you with your argument to both the BCSC and the TSX. V approval committees. Your argument goes like this: "No board of a publicly listed company should be allowed to encumber the primary assets of the company or use those assets to securitize a debt - a debt the company cannot provide evidence it can service with cash flow or funds derived from sources other than the proceeds of the debt itself. Any Board wishing to undertake a debt instrument such as a debenture which encumber the key assets of the corporation, must be presented before the shareholders of the company for their approval prior to being undertaken"
The purpose of this is to force Mcguigan and board to divulge how they intend to service the debt and thus mitigate the real danger of the shareholders loss of their key and core assets, the Lac Dore and the Iron T
Lastly - Familywealth- what makes you think the $2 million debenture is convertible?
Best,
PDO